I would buy the Oklahoma Thunder, rename them the Super Sonics and move them back home to Seattle along with their history where they belong. No Starbucks allowed to be sold in the arena.
I did like the question but no matter how much money I have I am not paying to pro athletes.
I'd rather spend 3+B on charity than to pay same for a sports franchise. I would give a whole lot of money to support boys and girls youth sports. I also would come up with $500K and a buy a parking place on Division Street.
Selfishly I for one don’t want you broadening your topics or geographical coverage. I like you focused on sports in Oregon and would hate to see it diluted.
Just my two cents. You flying solo is best thing that’s happened to sports coverage in Oregon in a long long time.
I would counter somewhat in that there is a great deal that happens regionally/across the conference and nationally that matters dramatically to the fortunes of both Oregon and Oregon State. They merit everyone's attention as well, and its good to have someone with an understanding of the local environment covering them to add the element of how it relates to and impacts the local scene to the coverage.
Per your request, I'm buying the Oakland A's and moving them to Portland......fastracking a new stadium......with my wealth, I can bring the other owners and the commissioner in line with the idea.
Love that idea Terry!!! Can I buy in as a minority partner for $2,500?? Can we bring back Ricky Henderson as player, first base coach? I am betting even at whatever age he currently is he could still steal 50 bases and be a league leader.
John, Whoever sent you the question on Bowl Game prospects without "marquee names" like UCLA and USC must be from one of those two schools. News Flash: USC and UCLA have not been marquee attractions in football for at least 15 years for USC (Pete Carroll era). For UCLA it is more like 30 years (Terry Donahue era). The baton was long ago passed off to SEC schools. Even B1G programs have a hard time staying out in front for national attention.
As far as scheduling, I think it would only be fitting that USC and UCLA get only road games within the PAC-12 so every school can have a good shot to take them down. I would love to see both leave the PAC-12 with 5-7 records and tails between their legs
As for spending $49B and buying a pro team, it is hard to beat your suggestion, John, so I won't try. I lived in Minnesota when the Packers sold shares to the public in 1997 (it had been over 40 years since the previous share sale). There was nothing but elation from all the Cheeseheads I know, both in Wisconsin and Minnesota. Everyone seems to have a stock certificate on their office wall. It is a matter of great public pride. It probably works best in a small town like Green Bay but fans would appreciate owning their own team anywhere.
Wayne Tinkle had a poor week-end in Utah and Colorado. He has lost to PSU twice already this season and to the Ducks 3 times. Why does he always tinkle his pants on tv? Minnesota Viks, Washington Huskies, and TCU all have a common denominator; they wear purple. Love to bet against the Viks in the play-offs; have lost rarely and cashed in on their 4 super bowl losses. Huskies basketball in toilet, and TCU will not beat Georgia on Monday. Beaver football will not beat Ducks next year and the new qb is crazy to leave Clemson and come to little Reser. Smith should have taken a real job and got paid. OSU pee you; maybe Tinkle can switch to another sport. How is Beaver track team? Did they put in the new 4 lane dirt track planned at Reser? Brian, I feel so sorry for your Beaver affiliation. See you at Autzen next year if you can make the drive. Pat Reser did not heed my advise and gave only 50 million dollars to the city of Beaverton, which was fine. I advised her to build a real stadium that seats more than 35,000, and get a new football coach and program. Maybe replace the new old Gill coliseum. Get a qb so John Canzano cannot blame qb play for the Beaver losses this year. If you have a calculator subtrack 30 from 60 Brian. UCLA and USC were smart to leave the Pac-12, as they only will get 30 million more per year when they join the Big 10 in 2024. Heard Tinkle will get a huge pay increase and stay at OSU for only 5 more years. Gill will be shut down by a fire marshal. Ralph Miller will be back soon. Gary Payton's son ended up in Portland. He fits the Blazers well. Poor team, a coach who was charged with sex crimes before Blazers hired him, and a team much like OSU basketball. Horrible hoops and Brian why did you bring back Tinkle? Your fault totally as a beaver believer. Wish the Ducks could catch OSU in Facilities before the end of the century. Why does OSU wear Nike? I know why but am sure you have not figured it out yet. OOOOOSSSSSUUUU pee you. get some new arenas or go join the BIG Sky, but not in basketball. Happy Birthday Brian. Ducks lost two Pac-12 games in football and Beavers three, and am sure glad Smith does not kick field goals in Seattle, or throw four picks at home vs. USC. Gloat all you want Mr. McMorris over your football season, as next year for you will be a big let down. Sure glad I chose U of O over baby bandits from cornwallis only 60 years ago. If you quit the kool-aid and go to Gill and see Wayne Tinkle it will cure your tears. My revenge will be oh so sweet in Seattle next fall, and then burying the Beavs at Autzen. Does OSU still have a mens baseball team; go ahead and gloat and make sure you remind us of the 2 natties, just 15 years ago Brian. Am sure you will not gloat over Wayne's basketball team. Do not forget to remind us all of female gym team and the new competitive cheer the Beavers will have in 2039. Go to Gill soon and see some real basketball......
WOOOOOOW big fella! It must really hurt to be the baby brother in this state. Check your stats big boy. U of O is a fine public University. However, OSU the first and foremost University in the state. OSU has the larger enrollment, greater funding from both alumni as well as research grants from public corporations. And by the way check out your 2000 stats the ducks are 1 and 2 versus the Beavs in Football, breakeven in basketball and WAAAAAY back in baseball. Your rock in track so congratulations on that!!!
Yes, of course USC and UCLA are marquee schools. Only emotion, not data would say otherwise. One of the most extensive value rankings done (July '22) for CFB programs used home attendance, market size/share, Wall St $ valuation, and social media power as their metric. The top Pac-12 school was USC (#20) and UCLA was 4th (27). WA (25), Oregon (26), ASU (35) were the other Pac-12 schools in top 35. Currency is important--it shows a trend. But in CFB tradition and history are a huge consideration for media, brand, and simple popularity.
Neither has been marquee for so long. Not sour grapes, but these things have a way of working themselves out. I can already tell Lincoln Riley is bored and you can expect him on an Nfl sideline within 3-4 years. Sc has atrocious record of recent coaching hires. They will be lost in the wilderness again. But hey, there is nothing like a cold winters night 1,000 miles inland. Enjoy it LA schools! Ha
"Marquee" implies a lot more than a lot of TV sets. It implies a team everyone in the country wants to watch, or as you say, popularity. I think the rankings you found are pretty accurate for an intangible idea like national popularity.
Chicago has a lot of TV sets. Their home college team is Northwestern. Are they a "marquee attraction"? Not so much. The rankings confirm that USC and UCLA (20 and 27) are not really "marquee" programs any longer and so no great loss to the PAC-12
Who said or even implied that "marquee" solely meant lots of TV sets? In any metric you choose, the two L.A. schools enjoy more recognition than most others nationally, certainly so in the Pac-12. Level heads could argue why that is, but not if that is. Look, I get your LA animus ("Deserted us!"), but let's keep it real.
I think they rightfully were concerned that college football was heading to a couple of super conferences and they did not want to be left out. When I first heard the news, I wished it had been USC and Oregon heading to the Big 10. So obviously did UO and Phil Knight.
USC may still be proven right. Perhaps the Big 12, Pac 12 and ACC are further decimated and USC was smart to jump when they had great negotiating power.
I suspect, though, with the 12 team play-off, the conference structure has stabilized, at least for a decade.
I worry USC is about to suffer Nebraska's fate.
In the 4 decades before joining the Big 10, Nebraska was the winningest program in college football, winning 79% of its games.
It had slid somewhat when it joined the Big 12, winning 65% of its games in the decade before joining the Big 10, but it was still very much nationally competitive. In its last 2 years in the Big 12, Nebraska was ranked, often in the top 10, and won the N. division both years, along with 10 win seasons.
Since joining the Big 10, Nebraska, with all of its resources and all of its history, has managed to become a break even football program (52%).
USC frankly enters the Big 10 on weaker footing than did Nebraska. In the last 40 years, USC has won 66% of its games and in the last 10, 65%.
On the plus side, USC fans seem willing to spend the money necessary to fund players for Riley. And at least last year, Riley's team had that lightning in the bottle kind of feeling with the rush of quality transfers.
The problem is, the Big 10 has Michigan, Penn State, Wisconsin and Ohio State.
If the Pac 12 survives, I think it will prove an easier platform for its top teams to enter the play-offs.
And the cautionary tale is not just Nebraska. Look at Arkansas, a team that won 73% of its games in the 3 decades before jumping to the SEC, including titles in the SWC its last two seasons there. They, like Nebraska, were a consistent, legitimate, national power.
They've won 50% since, mostly non-conference games.
For much of the last 3 decades, when factoring out the Pete Carroll era, USC has been a pedestrian football program. From 1990 to 1999, USC had the 5th best record in the Conference. Post Pete, the 4th best. Maybe Riley is the new Pete?
This ought to be interesting.
I agree that UCLA and USC can sort of be called Marquee programs. The Big 10 would not have wanted them if they did not bring some value. But keep in mind, The Big 10 also wanted Maryland and Rutgers. That's the crowd UCLA and USC are lumped into. They bring real value in terms of potential TV revenue.
Jack, you had a decent post until the Maryland/Rutgers thing. Sorry, that's an absurd comparison. I also find it clever the way you removed Pete Carroll to make a point. Why stop there? Why not remove Howard Jones, John McKay, and John Robinson, too? What's USC's winning percentage then...40%? All you prove, even in your Nebraska speech, is coaching in CFB is THE most important factor in success. Big shock! Nebraska's downfall was Tom Osborne retired, plain and simple. Alabama's resurgence was Nick Saban was hired, etc., etc. That's why programs go through cycles. They go through stretches of poor hires, or they can't keep the good ones they do hire. Or, they pour enormous sums of money into their program (Oklahoma St, Oregon, eg) to gain respectability. USC will be fine--they are not Nebraska. Since 2000, they have won 71% of their games. Not totally sure but it puts them something like top 10-12 nationally. That covers a period with great to horrible coaching hires.
Oh, and you are right about the 10th to 12th nationally in win percentage over the last 20 years. That is all due to Pete Carroll, the one proven hire in 40 years.
If you carve out his performance over the last 20 years, I think USC ranks around 30th.
I am frankly struggling to come up with a program, any program, who hires 8 coaches in 40 years and 7 of them are just that bad.
We'll find out if they are Nebraska or not. Funny thing, though. Nebraska did not fall off a cliff when Osborne retired. They had several very good seasons near the top of the Big 12.
They fell off the cliff when they joined the Big 10.
So now let's get to your critical point that coaching in CFB it THE most important factor in success.
Let's look at USC though that lense.
Well, it's been 40 years since John Robinson's initial retirement from USC and USC has shown almost no ability to hire quality coaches at the level of programs like Ohio State or Michigan.
In that 40 year era, USC has hired 9 coaches.
We don't know about Riley long term, but we do know about 7 of the 8 other hires and if they portend USC's knack for hiring coaches to fix problems, good luck on that one.
USC is pretty well screwed using your own standards if they continue to bat 12.5%.
Here's the USC Honor Roll:
Ted Tollner 56% win percentage
John Robinson, 2nd hire, 63% win percentage and declining when fired
Larry Smith looked good at first, but slid to 63% and declining when fired
Paul Hackett 51%
Pete Carroll - amazing win percentage but due to all the issues with the NCAA, I wasn't sure which games to include or not include. Funny thing about Pete Carroll. He was about the 9th choice and alumni were outraged. Odd how these things work out.
Lane Kiffin 62% and declining when fired
Sark 66% sad short tenure of a good man.
Clay Helton 67% and declining when fired
Riley - 78%
So, in 40 years, USC's brain trust hired 9 coaches. 8 of them were their first choice. One was a proven success over the long haul and he frankly was viewed as a stupid mistake by the alumni when initially hired.
7 coaches that were USC's first choice were train wrecks.
We'll find out about # 8 soon enough.
If you are counting on USC's long term nack for spotting and hiring talented coaches, USC is in bigger trouble than I thought.
Well, if we're talking "great restaurants", don't overlook the best foot-long hotdog on the West coast - Roake's in Jennings Lodge. I have 'em shipped to southern California every time I'm in the Portland area - that special sauce formula that Roake purchased years ago is one of a kind and the best I've had anywhere. That little trailer has been sitting in the same spot off of Highway 99E since the '30's and it's an absolute gem.
I'm sure this isn't what you and your reader were thinking about when he asked about your fav's, John, but Roake's deserves a big-time shout-out. Unbelievable foot-longs!
There was idle chatter a while back about MacKenzie Scott maybe buying the Blazers and/or Seahawks, as though she's got nothing better to do with her portion of the fortune she and her ex-husband amassed. All Scott has done since it's quietly donated her money to help make the world a better place.
Will she buy a team? I'm sure she could think of a dozen better ways to spend $10B. She's showing us.
What would I do if $49B fell from the sky and into my lap? I'd call Ms Scott and ask how I could help. After that, you'll likely find me living my best life at a $100 blackjack table at the Peppermill in Reno.
Let's dream more like MacKenzie Scott and less like Elon Musk.
Cal is participating actively in the transfer portal -- it's losing nearly all it's best players. The football team could join the basketball team in losing regularly to mid-major programs.
I have said this before, but I would love a deeply researched and human story on Dennis Erickson. He is such an interesting person from a football perspective and maybe non-football as well. He has a terrific track record and so he must do quite a few things right. But he also has demons and has had some bad gigs, like at Arizona State, which surprised me since ASU should have been easy to recruit to. What are these demons, and why? What makes him so great (I am guessing naked competitiveness that players can relate to).
John, you really would want the voting populous of Oregon to oversee the Trailblazers?...the same group who voted for gun control, who supports homeless drug addicts and anarchy? Our Founding Fathers decided against direct democracy for a reason.
Being someone who currently lives in Georgia and somehow wandered onto this site, (and what I would say has an excellent columnist and info on the Pac-12), to answer the $49 billion dollar question; 1)after I gave a lot of it to UGA so they could build a decent football team, 2) I would buy a hockey team and move it back to Atlanta, & 3) then start a PAC that would find intelligent, smart, compassionate people to serve in Congress. (Damn, think I could find anyone?)
The column does a poor job of explaining that Fresno State and SDSU are both legally (thanks to Cal Lobbying) prevented from offering Doctoral degrees on their own.
SDSU only offers degrees because UCSD and UCI have been willing to sponsor joint degrees with SDSU. Cal and UCDavis have been unwilling to do so with Fresno State. This joint doctoral degrees could easily be done as Fresno has plenty of strong programs like viticulture.
So the concern about their academics is wholly within the control of Cal. Just like Cal lobbied the politicians to hamper UCLA, they lobby the politicians to prevent Cal States from issuing doctoral degrees. In the case of the former writers held them accountable, in the latter you and Wilner are silent and complicit. Why?
Tell the truth about this double standard. Or does the Bald faced truth only come into play when it’s convenient?
This is really interesting insight. Being a native Oregonian who lived in Sothern California for 40 years I have always thought that if Boisie State could be in the national conversation SDSU should be in contention for the national championship every single season. They have a great alumni base, tons of donors and the ability to recruit without ever having to get on an airplane due to all of the talent that lies within a 4 hour or less, by car, radius from the campus. Plus you get to live in SD and all that comes with that!!
This is why Cal especially and some others have fought any legitimization of SD St, Fresno St., or Boise St for that matter. Why have to compete with better competition if you can exclude them from the table?
Before USC went B1G, SC Prez Carol Folt lobbied against the Pac-12 going to the Pac-20 because the incoming schools, sans Kansas, would not be AAU members.
Hypocrisy is everywhere but it is astoundingly large in academia.
It's lunacy. Literally no one, athlete OR general student population, is going to decide to enroll at one school, or not enroll, be it Cal or Oregon State, based on what is or isn't offered at some other school the team from Cal/OSU/etc. will play against.
If I’m not mistaken, a prerequisite of becoming a member in the PAC12 is that every university has to be a research university. If not, they don’t get consideration.
Right and neither are Tier 1 Research Universities because Cal lobbied the California State Legislature to prevent the Cal States from offering their own doctoral degrees in applied sciences. Furthermore, unlike UCSD and UCI who partner with SDSU, Cal also refuses to partner with Fresno to offer joint degrees hurting the economy of the valley.
Cal’s underhanded double dealing relative to Fresno is what Newsom should be investigating and what Canzano should be talking about. Instead they let Cal try to steal money from UCLA. Cal is a truly evil organization that should be exposed.
Evil? Evil is bombing power grids in the middle of winter to try to demoralize people by freezing them to death. Cal’s just self-interested and short-sighted like the majority of academic institutions and corporations. And yes, it economically hurts the economy of valley, but they’d have to look beyond the confines of their campus to bother to notice.
A state entity selfishly putting their interests over the interests of the state to me is evil. Not inner circle of hell evil but evil nevertheless. Like UVA did with V-Tech, Cal and Cal politicians should be looking out for Fresno and SDSU not underhandedly trying to hold them back.
how about Wayne Tinkles Beavers? just because your daughter goes to OSU and you love beaver football, instead of bashing the Ducks at Colorado, please comment about how OSU kept Tinkle after his record last year? He tinkles on himself and Beaver basketball is a sad joke. Keep telling your dental lady that you are a city-wide celeb or a sumo wrestler. From now on I must fact check you on pac-12 football. Did your home boy on your podcast, which I can not listen to anymore, ever learn how to tip? You are very biased and sure hope you never buy the Blazers. Jody Allen, whom I despise because of her refusal to sell Blazers to Phil Knight, is a poor owner. I finished so far at 58 per cent on football in real money at an Oregon casino in Sheridan, Or. My picks for the super bowl are Eagles vs. KC. Georgia, as I stated months ago, will repeat in the natty. They might not cover the 14, but I have them at bet 600 to win 100, with no point spread. Am taking Green Bay tomorrow at home vs. the Lions. Duck basketball won at Utah tonight and looked good. WSU won at Arizona. Beavers only lost by 20. Please keep bashing the Ducks; they might surprise you. Your Beaver bias is very obvious. GO DUCKS. p.s. I asked you before to PLEASE stop putting random 6.99 charges on my credit cards and you did not. I only want one charge for your column, and no recurring charges on other one- month gifts I bought. Your reply was that I could buy yearly gifts for all was beyond unacceptable. Do not care about your past with Bobby Knight or others like Fresno State. If you support adding Gonzaga to pac-10 for basketball only, we do not want mr. DUI Mark Few. No wonder Zags always make the final 64; their league is very weak. Basketball does not produce as much revenue as football, and Gonzaga has trouble in flag football. The Pac-10 has enough money problems and San Diego State has a jv stadium like OSU. It will take at least 5 years for pac-12 football to make the final four. Look out for USC and UCLA in the Big 10 in 2024. Travel is no big deal when your school gets 30 or so million more than the poor sisters in the Pac-10 or 12. Lincoln Riley and Chip Kelly can just recruit the LA area and pay the players. PSU has beaten the Beavers only twice this year in mens basketball.
If I won the lottery I’d bring back the Portland Mavericks. The rest of the money would go to getting kids involved in team sports so kids without money could be on travel teams, etc.
I would buy the Oklahoma Thunder, rename them the Super Sonics and move them back home to Seattle along with their history where they belong. No Starbucks allowed to be sold in the arena.
Using that fun theory, I'd buy the KC Chiefs and move them back to Dallas.
I like it.
I did like the question but no matter how much money I have I am not paying to pro athletes.
I'd rather spend 3+B on charity than to pay same for a sports franchise. I would give a whole lot of money to support boys and girls youth sports. I also would come up with $500K and a buy a parking place on Division Street.
Selfishly I for one don’t want you broadening your topics or geographical coverage. I like you focused on sports in Oregon and would hate to see it diluted.
Just my two cents. You flying solo is best thing that’s happened to sports coverage in Oregon in a long long time.
I would counter somewhat in that there is a great deal that happens regionally/across the conference and nationally that matters dramatically to the fortunes of both Oregon and Oregon State. They merit everyone's attention as well, and its good to have someone with an understanding of the local environment covering them to add the element of how it relates to and impacts the local scene to the coverage.
Per your request, I'm buying the Oakland A's and moving them to Portland......fastracking a new stadium......with my wealth, I can bring the other owners and the commissioner in line with the idea.
I like it.
I really think major league baseball would thrive in Portland.
The real question would be where to place a park. It has to be easy to get to most days, in the immediate aftermath of rush hour.
Love that idea Terry!!! Can I buy in as a minority partner for $2,500?? Can we bring back Ricky Henderson as player, first base coach? I am betting even at whatever age he currently is he could still steal 50 bases and be a league leader.
John, Whoever sent you the question on Bowl Game prospects without "marquee names" like UCLA and USC must be from one of those two schools. News Flash: USC and UCLA have not been marquee attractions in football for at least 15 years for USC (Pete Carroll era). For UCLA it is more like 30 years (Terry Donahue era). The baton was long ago passed off to SEC schools. Even B1G programs have a hard time staying out in front for national attention.
As far as scheduling, I think it would only be fitting that USC and UCLA get only road games within the PAC-12 so every school can have a good shot to take them down. I would love to see both leave the PAC-12 with 5-7 records and tails between their legs
As for spending $49B and buying a pro team, it is hard to beat your suggestion, John, so I won't try. I lived in Minnesota when the Packers sold shares to the public in 1997 (it had been over 40 years since the previous share sale). There was nothing but elation from all the Cheeseheads I know, both in Wisconsin and Minnesota. Everyone seems to have a stock certificate on their office wall. It is a matter of great public pride. It probably works best in a small town like Green Bay but fans would appreciate owning their own team anywhere.
PS: UCLA was sixth.
With its pre-conference schedule, UCLA reaching only 9 wins was an embarrassing and epic fail.
Wayne Tinkle had a poor week-end in Utah and Colorado. He has lost to PSU twice already this season and to the Ducks 3 times. Why does he always tinkle his pants on tv? Minnesota Viks, Washington Huskies, and TCU all have a common denominator; they wear purple. Love to bet against the Viks in the play-offs; have lost rarely and cashed in on their 4 super bowl losses. Huskies basketball in toilet, and TCU will not beat Georgia on Monday. Beaver football will not beat Ducks next year and the new qb is crazy to leave Clemson and come to little Reser. Smith should have taken a real job and got paid. OSU pee you; maybe Tinkle can switch to another sport. How is Beaver track team? Did they put in the new 4 lane dirt track planned at Reser? Brian, I feel so sorry for your Beaver affiliation. See you at Autzen next year if you can make the drive. Pat Reser did not heed my advise and gave only 50 million dollars to the city of Beaverton, which was fine. I advised her to build a real stadium that seats more than 35,000, and get a new football coach and program. Maybe replace the new old Gill coliseum. Get a qb so John Canzano cannot blame qb play for the Beaver losses this year. If you have a calculator subtrack 30 from 60 Brian. UCLA and USC were smart to leave the Pac-12, as they only will get 30 million more per year when they join the Big 10 in 2024. Heard Tinkle will get a huge pay increase and stay at OSU for only 5 more years. Gill will be shut down by a fire marshal. Ralph Miller will be back soon. Gary Payton's son ended up in Portland. He fits the Blazers well. Poor team, a coach who was charged with sex crimes before Blazers hired him, and a team much like OSU basketball. Horrible hoops and Brian why did you bring back Tinkle? Your fault totally as a beaver believer. Wish the Ducks could catch OSU in Facilities before the end of the century. Why does OSU wear Nike? I know why but am sure you have not figured it out yet. OOOOOSSSSSUUUU pee you. get some new arenas or go join the BIG Sky, but not in basketball. Happy Birthday Brian. Ducks lost two Pac-12 games in football and Beavers three, and am sure glad Smith does not kick field goals in Seattle, or throw four picks at home vs. USC. Gloat all you want Mr. McMorris over your football season, as next year for you will be a big let down. Sure glad I chose U of O over baby bandits from cornwallis only 60 years ago. If you quit the kool-aid and go to Gill and see Wayne Tinkle it will cure your tears. My revenge will be oh so sweet in Seattle next fall, and then burying the Beavs at Autzen. Does OSU still have a mens baseball team; go ahead and gloat and make sure you remind us of the 2 natties, just 15 years ago Brian. Am sure you will not gloat over Wayne's basketball team. Do not forget to remind us all of female gym team and the new competitive cheer the Beavers will have in 2039. Go to Gill soon and see some real basketball......
WOOOOOOW big fella! It must really hurt to be the baby brother in this state. Check your stats big boy. U of O is a fine public University. However, OSU the first and foremost University in the state. OSU has the larger enrollment, greater funding from both alumni as well as research grants from public corporations. And by the way check out your 2000 stats the ducks are 1 and 2 versus the Beavs in Football, breakeven in basketball and WAAAAAY back in baseball. Your rock in track so congratulations on that!!!
Wow I am guessing you did NOT begin to round out your competitive cheer outfit. What year did you graduate honey?
Yes, of course USC and UCLA are marquee schools. Only emotion, not data would say otherwise. One of the most extensive value rankings done (July '22) for CFB programs used home attendance, market size/share, Wall St $ valuation, and social media power as their metric. The top Pac-12 school was USC (#20) and UCLA was 4th (27). WA (25), Oregon (26), ASU (35) were the other Pac-12 schools in top 35. Currency is important--it shows a trend. But in CFB tradition and history are a huge consideration for media, brand, and simple popularity.
Neither has been marquee for so long. Not sour grapes, but these things have a way of working themselves out. I can already tell Lincoln Riley is bored and you can expect him on an Nfl sideline within 3-4 years. Sc has atrocious record of recent coaching hires. They will be lost in the wilderness again. But hey, there is nothing like a cold winters night 1,000 miles inland. Enjoy it LA schools! Ha
"Marquee" implies a lot more than a lot of TV sets. It implies a team everyone in the country wants to watch, or as you say, popularity. I think the rankings you found are pretty accurate for an intangible idea like national popularity.
Chicago has a lot of TV sets. Their home college team is Northwestern. Are they a "marquee attraction"? Not so much. The rankings confirm that USC and UCLA (20 and 27) are not really "marquee" programs any longer and so no great loss to the PAC-12
Who said or even implied that "marquee" solely meant lots of TV sets? In any metric you choose, the two L.A. schools enjoy more recognition than most others nationally, certainly so in the Pac-12. Level heads could argue why that is, but not if that is. Look, I get your LA animus ("Deserted us!"), but let's keep it real.
Here is my two cents worth regarding USC's move.
I think they rightfully were concerned that college football was heading to a couple of super conferences and they did not want to be left out. When I first heard the news, I wished it had been USC and Oregon heading to the Big 10. So obviously did UO and Phil Knight.
USC may still be proven right. Perhaps the Big 12, Pac 12 and ACC are further decimated and USC was smart to jump when they had great negotiating power.
I suspect, though, with the 12 team play-off, the conference structure has stabilized, at least for a decade.
I worry USC is about to suffer Nebraska's fate.
In the 4 decades before joining the Big 10, Nebraska was the winningest program in college football, winning 79% of its games.
It had slid somewhat when it joined the Big 12, winning 65% of its games in the decade before joining the Big 10, but it was still very much nationally competitive. In its last 2 years in the Big 12, Nebraska was ranked, often in the top 10, and won the N. division both years, along with 10 win seasons.
Since joining the Big 10, Nebraska, with all of its resources and all of its history, has managed to become a break even football program (52%).
USC frankly enters the Big 10 on weaker footing than did Nebraska. In the last 40 years, USC has won 66% of its games and in the last 10, 65%.
On the plus side, USC fans seem willing to spend the money necessary to fund players for Riley. And at least last year, Riley's team had that lightning in the bottle kind of feeling with the rush of quality transfers.
The problem is, the Big 10 has Michigan, Penn State, Wisconsin and Ohio State.
If the Pac 12 survives, I think it will prove an easier platform for its top teams to enter the play-offs.
And the cautionary tale is not just Nebraska. Look at Arkansas, a team that won 73% of its games in the 3 decades before jumping to the SEC, including titles in the SWC its last two seasons there. They, like Nebraska, were a consistent, legitimate, national power.
They've won 50% since, mostly non-conference games.
For much of the last 3 decades, when factoring out the Pete Carroll era, USC has been a pedestrian football program. From 1990 to 1999, USC had the 5th best record in the Conference. Post Pete, the 4th best. Maybe Riley is the new Pete?
This ought to be interesting.
I agree that UCLA and USC can sort of be called Marquee programs. The Big 10 would not have wanted them if they did not bring some value. But keep in mind, The Big 10 also wanted Maryland and Rutgers. That's the crowd UCLA and USC are lumped into. They bring real value in terms of potential TV revenue.
Jack, you had a decent post until the Maryland/Rutgers thing. Sorry, that's an absurd comparison. I also find it clever the way you removed Pete Carroll to make a point. Why stop there? Why not remove Howard Jones, John McKay, and John Robinson, too? What's USC's winning percentage then...40%? All you prove, even in your Nebraska speech, is coaching in CFB is THE most important factor in success. Big shock! Nebraska's downfall was Tom Osborne retired, plain and simple. Alabama's resurgence was Nick Saban was hired, etc., etc. That's why programs go through cycles. They go through stretches of poor hires, or they can't keep the good ones they do hire. Or, they pour enormous sums of money into their program (Oklahoma St, Oregon, eg) to gain respectability. USC will be fine--they are not Nebraska. Since 2000, they have won 71% of their games. Not totally sure but it puts them something like top 10-12 nationally. That covers a period with great to horrible coaching hires.
Oh, and you are right about the 10th to 12th nationally in win percentage over the last 20 years. That is all due to Pete Carroll, the one proven hire in 40 years.
If you carve out his performance over the last 20 years, I think USC ranks around 30th.
I am frankly struggling to come up with a program, any program, who hires 8 coaches in 40 years and 7 of them are just that bad.
We'll find out if they are Nebraska or not. Funny thing, though. Nebraska did not fall off a cliff when Osborne retired. They had several very good seasons near the top of the Big 12.
They fell off the cliff when they joined the Big 10.
So now let's get to your critical point that coaching in CFB it THE most important factor in success.
Let's look at USC though that lense.
Well, it's been 40 years since John Robinson's initial retirement from USC and USC has shown almost no ability to hire quality coaches at the level of programs like Ohio State or Michigan.
In that 40 year era, USC has hired 9 coaches.
We don't know about Riley long term, but we do know about 7 of the 8 other hires and if they portend USC's knack for hiring coaches to fix problems, good luck on that one.
USC is pretty well screwed using your own standards if they continue to bat 12.5%.
Here's the USC Honor Roll:
Ted Tollner 56% win percentage
John Robinson, 2nd hire, 63% win percentage and declining when fired
Larry Smith looked good at first, but slid to 63% and declining when fired
Paul Hackett 51%
Pete Carroll - amazing win percentage but due to all the issues with the NCAA, I wasn't sure which games to include or not include. Funny thing about Pete Carroll. He was about the 9th choice and alumni were outraged. Odd how these things work out.
Lane Kiffin 62% and declining when fired
Sark 66% sad short tenure of a good man.
Clay Helton 67% and declining when fired
Riley - 78%
So, in 40 years, USC's brain trust hired 9 coaches. 8 of them were their first choice. One was a proven success over the long haul and he frankly was viewed as a stupid mistake by the alumni when initially hired.
7 coaches that were USC's first choice were train wrecks.
We'll find out about # 8 soon enough.
If you are counting on USC's long term nack for spotting and hiring talented coaches, USC is in bigger trouble than I thought.
Well, if we're talking "great restaurants", don't overlook the best foot-long hotdog on the West coast - Roake's in Jennings Lodge. I have 'em shipped to southern California every time I'm in the Portland area - that special sauce formula that Roake purchased years ago is one of a kind and the best I've had anywhere. That little trailer has been sitting in the same spot off of Highway 99E since the '30's and it's an absolute gem.
I'm sure this isn't what you and your reader were thinking about when he asked about your fav's, John, but Roake's deserves a big-time shout-out. Unbelievable foot-longs!
Yes, that little trailer is a gold mine. I worked 40 years on McLoughlin Blvd., and consumed my share of foot-longs!
Wish I had worked close by...I'm jealous! Their hamburgers are underrated, too, just very good. But the foot-long dogs are the best anywhere!
I grew up there and it makes me happy that Roake’s is still around.
There was idle chatter a while back about MacKenzie Scott maybe buying the Blazers and/or Seahawks, as though she's got nothing better to do with her portion of the fortune she and her ex-husband amassed. All Scott has done since it's quietly donated her money to help make the world a better place.
Will she buy a team? I'm sure she could think of a dozen better ways to spend $10B. She's showing us.
What would I do if $49B fell from the sky and into my lap? I'd call Ms Scott and ask how I could help. After that, you'll likely find me living my best life at a $100 blackjack table at the Peppermill in Reno.
Let's dream more like MacKenzie Scott and less like Elon Musk.
Cal is participating actively in the transfer portal -- it's losing nearly all it's best players. The football team could join the basketball team in losing regularly to mid-major programs.
I have said this before, but I would love a deeply researched and human story on Dennis Erickson. He is such an interesting person from a football perspective and maybe non-football as well. He has a terrific track record and so he must do quite a few things right. But he also has demons and has had some bad gigs, like at Arizona State, which surprised me since ASU should have been easy to recruit to. What are these demons, and why? What makes him so great (I am guessing naked competitiveness that players can relate to).
John, you really would want the voting populous of Oregon to oversee the Trailblazers?...the same group who voted for gun control, who supports homeless drug addicts and anarchy? Our Founding Fathers decided against direct democracy for a reason.
Being someone who currently lives in Georgia and somehow wandered onto this site, (and what I would say has an excellent columnist and info on the Pac-12), to answer the $49 billion dollar question; 1)after I gave a lot of it to UGA so they could build a decent football team, 2) I would buy a hockey team and move it back to Atlanta, & 3) then start a PAC that would find intelligent, smart, compassionate people to serve in Congress. (Damn, think I could find anyone?)
49 billion? I'd buy the Beavers and set them up. Why not? Phil did it with UO.
What about all the Blazer fans in SW Washington? They deserve shares if you bought the Blazers.
The column does a poor job of explaining that Fresno State and SDSU are both legally (thanks to Cal Lobbying) prevented from offering Doctoral degrees on their own.
SDSU only offers degrees because UCSD and UCI have been willing to sponsor joint degrees with SDSU. Cal and UCDavis have been unwilling to do so with Fresno State. This joint doctoral degrees could easily be done as Fresno has plenty of strong programs like viticulture.
So the concern about their academics is wholly within the control of Cal. Just like Cal lobbied the politicians to hamper UCLA, they lobby the politicians to prevent Cal States from issuing doctoral degrees. In the case of the former writers held them accountable, in the latter you and Wilner are silent and complicit. Why?
Tell the truth about this double standard. Or does the Bald faced truth only come into play when it’s convenient?
This is really interesting insight. Being a native Oregonian who lived in Sothern California for 40 years I have always thought that if Boisie State could be in the national conversation SDSU should be in contention for the national championship every single season. They have a great alumni base, tons of donors and the ability to recruit without ever having to get on an airplane due to all of the talent that lies within a 4 hour or less, by car, radius from the campus. Plus you get to live in SD and all that comes with that!!
This is why Cal especially and some others have fought any legitimization of SD St, Fresno St., or Boise St for that matter. Why have to compete with better competition if you can exclude them from the table?
Before USC went B1G, SC Prez Carol Folt lobbied against the Pac-12 going to the Pac-20 because the incoming schools, sans Kansas, would not be AAU members.
Hypocrisy is everywhere but it is astoundingly large in academia.
It's lunacy. Literally no one, athlete OR general student population, is going to decide to enroll at one school, or not enroll, be it Cal or Oregon State, based on what is or isn't offered at some other school the team from Cal/OSU/etc. will play against.
If I’m not mistaken, a prerequisite of becoming a member in the PAC12 is that every university has to be a research university. If not, they don’t get consideration.
Right and neither are Tier 1 Research Universities because Cal lobbied the California State Legislature to prevent the Cal States from offering their own doctoral degrees in applied sciences. Furthermore, unlike UCSD and UCI who partner with SDSU, Cal also refuses to partner with Fresno to offer joint degrees hurting the economy of the valley.
Cal’s underhanded double dealing relative to Fresno is what Newsom should be investigating and what Canzano should be talking about. Instead they let Cal try to steal money from UCLA. Cal is a truly evil organization that should be exposed.
Evil? Evil is bombing power grids in the middle of winter to try to demoralize people by freezing them to death. Cal’s just self-interested and short-sighted like the majority of academic institutions and corporations. And yes, it economically hurts the economy of valley, but they’d have to look beyond the confines of their campus to bother to notice.
A state entity selfishly putting their interests over the interests of the state to me is evil. Not inner circle of hell evil but evil nevertheless. Like UVA did with V-Tech, Cal and Cal politicians should be looking out for Fresno and SDSU not underhandedly trying to hold them back.
You had me at “not inner circle of hell evil but…” 😂. And yes, both corps and academic institutions have societal responsibilities. We agree there.
https://gprivate.com/62sfw
How about a feature on the great Oregon sports journalists (print and tv/radio) over the years.
how about Wayne Tinkles Beavers? just because your daughter goes to OSU and you love beaver football, instead of bashing the Ducks at Colorado, please comment about how OSU kept Tinkle after his record last year? He tinkles on himself and Beaver basketball is a sad joke. Keep telling your dental lady that you are a city-wide celeb or a sumo wrestler. From now on I must fact check you on pac-12 football. Did your home boy on your podcast, which I can not listen to anymore, ever learn how to tip? You are very biased and sure hope you never buy the Blazers. Jody Allen, whom I despise because of her refusal to sell Blazers to Phil Knight, is a poor owner. I finished so far at 58 per cent on football in real money at an Oregon casino in Sheridan, Or. My picks for the super bowl are Eagles vs. KC. Georgia, as I stated months ago, will repeat in the natty. They might not cover the 14, but I have them at bet 600 to win 100, with no point spread. Am taking Green Bay tomorrow at home vs. the Lions. Duck basketball won at Utah tonight and looked good. WSU won at Arizona. Beavers only lost by 20. Please keep bashing the Ducks; they might surprise you. Your Beaver bias is very obvious. GO DUCKS. p.s. I asked you before to PLEASE stop putting random 6.99 charges on my credit cards and you did not. I only want one charge for your column, and no recurring charges on other one- month gifts I bought. Your reply was that I could buy yearly gifts for all was beyond unacceptable. Do not care about your past with Bobby Knight or others like Fresno State. If you support adding Gonzaga to pac-10 for basketball only, we do not want mr. DUI Mark Few. No wonder Zags always make the final 64; their league is very weak. Basketball does not produce as much revenue as football, and Gonzaga has trouble in flag football. The Pac-10 has enough money problems and San Diego State has a jv stadium like OSU. It will take at least 5 years for pac-12 football to make the final four. Look out for USC and UCLA in the Big 10 in 2024. Travel is no big deal when your school gets 30 or so million more than the poor sisters in the Pac-10 or 12. Lincoln Riley and Chip Kelly can just recruit the LA area and pay the players. PSU has beaten the Beavers only twice this year in mens basketball.
If I won the lottery I’d bring back the Portland Mavericks. The rest of the money would go to getting kids involved in team sports so kids without money could be on travel teams, etc.